Comparison of cost of care for tethered versus non‐tethered ureteric stents in the management of uncomplicated upper urinary tract stones

Okullo, Alfin; Yuminaga, Yuigi; Ziaziaris, William; Ende, David; Lau, Howard; Brooks, Andrew J.; Patel, Manish I.; Bariol, Simon V.

doi:10.1111/ans.13945

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 10 publications

(18 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Based on an average 285 km (177 mile) round trip made by patients for cystoscopic stent removal and the cost of driving at $0.15–0.35/km ($0.40–0.90/mile; based on American Automobile Association estimates), Barnes et al [7] estimated a $68–185 saving per patient on travel costs if patients removed their own stents at home. Recently, Okullo et al [21] reported the overall cost of care was (in Australian dollars) a mean (SD) of $3603.6 (1896.7) vs $4468.1 (820.8) ( P = 0.042) for string vs no-string stents, respectively. Such savings may have less impact in smaller countries where distances travelled by patients to their healthcare provider are far less.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The use of a string with a stent for self-removal following ureteroscopy: A safe practice to remain

Doersch

Elmekresh

Machen

et al. 2018

Arab Journal of Urology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

objectivesTo examine the safety and effectiveness of the use of a stent with a string attached after ureteroscopy (URS) for self-removal of the stent by the patient.Patients and methodsAfter Institutional Review Board approval, a retrospective chart review was performed concerning patients who underwent URS and received an indwelling stent with or without a string attached to the stent (94 vs 349, respectively). Amongst the string group patients received a single- or a double-arm-stringed stent (31 vs 63, respectively). Statistical analyses included chi-squared and Student’s t-tests.ResultsThe string group consisted of 94 procedures, in which 59.6% of the patients were male with a mean (SD) age of 50.0 (16.5) years. In the no-string group, 51.3% of the 349 procedures were performed in males and the mean (SD) age was 54.9 (18.1) years. Complication rates were 12.8% in the string group and 14.0% in the no-string group (P = 0.867). In the string group, 17.0% of the patients returned to the Emergency Department, whilst 15.8% of the no-string patients returned (P = 0.753). The complication rate in the single- and double-arm groups were 12.9% and 12.7%, respectively (P > 0.910). Self-removal of stents was successful in 94.7% of patients (89/94).ConclusionsThe use of a stent with a string after URS appears safe and effective. Few patients had difficulty removing their stents and complication rates were similar in the groups with and without a string attached to their stents. Single- and double-arm-stringed stents have similar complication rates.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The use of a string with a stent for self-removal following ureteroscopy: A safe practice to remain

Doersch

Elmekresh

Machen

et al. 2018

Arab Journal of Urology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Apart from avoiding the possible complications related to a cystoscopy, this method can also reduce healthcare-related costs produced by a cystoscopy. An Australian group reported a cost-saving of A$864.5 per case when using tethered stents [121] . There are however concerns of potential dislodgement, discomfort due to the string and risk of developing a UTI.…”

Section: Procedures For Stent Removalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ureteral stents in urolithiasis

Beysens

Tailly

2018

Asian Journal of Urology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ever since the ureteral stent design was fitted with a curl on both sides to prevent it from migrating up or down the ureter some 40 years ago, its use has gained tremendous momentum, aiding in the rise and evolution of endourology and has confidently kept its place in modern time urology. Over the past four decades, several designs, coating and biomaterials have been developed, trying to reduce infection, encrustation and other stent related symptoms. As the ideal stent has not yet been discovered, different ways of helping patients with their complaints have been researched. This review will cover these aspects of stent use in urolithiasis.

show abstract

Cost analysis of removing pediatric ureteral stents with and without a retrieval string

Gleber

Bush

et al. 2019

Journal of Pediatric Urology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Comparison of cost of care for tethered versus non‐tethered ureteric stents in the management of uncomplicated upper urinary tract stones

Abstract: It is cheaper to use a tethered ureteric stent compared with non-tethered stents for short-term stenting after uncomplicated URSL, with a mean cost saving of A$864.5.

Cited by 3 publications

References 10 publications

The use of a string with a stent for self-removal following ureteroscopy: A safe practice to remain

The use of a string with a stent for self-removal following ureteroscopy: A safe practice to remain

Ureteral stents in urolithiasis

Cost analysis of removing pediatric ureteral stents with and without a retrieval string

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About